an examination of male and female attitudes toward career and family issues

Sex Roles, VoL 25, Nos. 7/8, 1991

An Examination of Male and Female Attitudes Toward Career and Family Issues I

Teresa Joyce Covin 2 and Christina Christenson Brush Kennesaw State College

This paper presents the results" of a study des'igned to investigate attitudes toward various career and family issues. The sample for the study consists of 240 undergraduate and graduate students" enrolled in busbwss courses. Results indicate differences in men's" and women's" perceptions of such issues as employer and government support for child care, parental responsibility, traditionally defined sex roles, and the impact of" nonwork issues on work effectiveness. Gender differences were also evident in decisions made by study participants in response to several career-family scenarios developed by the researchers.

The recent mommy-track debate (Schwartz, 1989) has resulted in a re- newed interest in examining potential conflicts between family life and career demands. While previous research has clearly established the exist- ence of challenges faced by working parents (see, for example, Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Pleck, Staines, & Lang, 198(I; Voydanoff & Kelly, 1984, 1985), organizations have generally been slow to recognize the consequences Of work-family interdependence (Rodgers & Rodgers, 1989).

The failure to deal with this critical interdependency may be a serious mistake. Several researchers have argued that family-responsive policies and programs will be necessary to attract and retain needed employees, and to build and maintain competitive advantages (Doyle, 1989; Schuler

1An earlier version of this article was presented at the 1990 meetings of the Academy of Management.

2"1"o whom correspondence should be addressed at School of Business, Kennesaw State College, Marietta, Georgia 30061.

393

0360--0025/91/10004)3935(16.50/0 © 1991 Plenum Publishing Corporation

394 Covin and Brush

& MacMillan, 1984). In addition, growing evidence suggests that conflicts between work and family are related to decreased productivity (Fernandez, 1986; O'Carolan, 1987; Schmidt, 1989), lost work time (Employee Benefit Plan Review, 1985), job dissatisfaction (Wiley, 1987), and intention to turn- over (Burke, 1989).

The purpose of the study reported here was to examine the attitudes of men and women concerning the accommodation of work and family demands. The study focused on three general research questions:

1. What are the perceptions of individuals regarding such issues as the role of government, employers, and parents in managing the work-family interface, and what are individuals' attitudes toward work, family, and the role of men and women in each environment?

2. How do individuals respond to specific career scenarios representing some of the career-family trade-offs experienced by individuals in today's work force, and how are attitudes toward the specific career-family issues discussed above related to responses to these career scenarios?

3. Are there gender-based differences in individuals' attitudes toward the career issues and/or responses to the career scenarios?

The Impact of the Career-Family b~terdependency

Traditionally, the problem of juggling career and family demands has been viewed as a female concern, and maternal employment has been defined as a problem competing with children and family for the working mother's time, energy, and commitment (Meneghan & Parcel, 1990). How- ever, social norms that, in the past, "permitted" women to focus on family needs while allowing men to give primary attention to work (Pleck, 1977) are reversing (Justin & Stafford, 1985; Orthner, 1980). Men appear to be increasingly concerned about balancing family and career demands, and are making accommodations in favor of a working wife or family (Hall, 1989, 1990; Leinster, 1988; Pleck, 1985; Wilcox, 1989).

Recent studies of several well-known companies have suggested that both men and women feel the impact of work-family conflicts (see, for example, Baderschneider, 1989; Gier, 1989; Hughes, 1988; Kraut, 1990; Trost, 19877). Working spouses of both sexes report that family responsibilities negatively affect their careers and ability to advance (Burden & Googins, 1987; Chapman, 1989; Trost, 1988), as well as their ability to con- centrate and make judgments at work (Axel, 1985; Green, 1989). A poll conducted by the New York Times revealed that both men and women were dissatisfied with the effects of job demands on their family and personal

Male and Female Attitudes Toward Career and Family 395

lives, with 83% of working mothers and 72% of working fathers stating they were torn by conflicting demands of their jobs and their desire to see more of their families (Atlanta Journal and Constitution, 1989). It should not be surprising, then, that family-related problems represent the most common worker difficulty brought to employee assistance programs (Stackel, 1987).

Still, women appear affected by work-family conflicts to a greater extent than men. Research on gender differences in symptoms and levels of stress resulting from work-family conflict has established that women tend to experience greater stress than men (Davidson & Cooper, 1985; Jick & Mitz, 1985; Zappert & Weinstein, 1985). Wiley and Eskilson (1988) found that both men and women rate work-family conflicts as a more sta- ble cause of unsatisfactory job performance for women than for men. There are several reasons why this may be the case. First, while men may be assuming increasing responsibility for both child care and household tasks (Ferree, 1990; Thompson & Walker, 1989), women continue to bear primary responsibility for care giving at home despite their employment status or the presence of children (Barnett & Baruch, 1987; Berk, 1985; Gutek, Nakamura, & Nieva, 1981; Shelton & Firestone, 1988). Burden and Goog- ins (1987) reported that working mothers in their study worked the equiva- lent of two full-time jobs.

Second, although there has been considerable change in attitudes toward the role of women in society (Dambrot, Papp, & Whitmore, 1984; Helmreich, Spence, & Gibson, 1982), research suggests that general stereotypes about women are deeply held and resistant to change (Heilman & Martell, 1986). Overall, male attitudes remain traditional as males tend to believe it is better for everyone if men work outside the home and women attend to home-family matters (Thornton, 1989). Several specific stereotypes are particularly detrimental in easing work-family conflicts for women. Russo (1976) suggests that working mothers are burdened by the "motherhood mandate" depicting good mothers as physically present and available to meet their children's needs. This bias has led employed mothers to be viewed as less dedicated to families, less sensitive to the needs of others, less affectionate, and more selfish than stay-at-home mothers (Etaugh & Study, 1989; Etaugh &~Nekolny, 1990). Much research also documents the widely held perception that a working mother's performance is less favorable because children are expected to adversely affect job performance (Etaugh & Kasley, 1981; Etaugh & Poertner, 1989; Russell & Rush, 1987).

Finally, the impact of the realities and stereotypes discussed above often causes employers to question the work commitment of women. In fact, the primacy of job commitment for men and family commitment for

396 Covin and Brush

women has been assumed in much of social science literature (Bernard, 1981). Such an assumption often puts women in the position of having to constantly prove they are good employees. This is particularly true for working mothers. For example, Sobkowski (1989) suggests that women are perceived as less committed to their jobs when they bring family-related concerns to work and that this is not necessarily the case for men. Even if women exert the same effort as before childbirth and do not change their performance levels, their job commitment tends to be viewed as having been dissipated by their parental responsibilities (Hall, 1990).

Hypotheses

Given the research questions and literature cited above, the following general hypotheses are suggested. First, because work-family conflict appears to have a greater impact on women,

HI: women will indicate stronger support/concern for issues related to active employer and government intervention in helping people to manage the work-family interface than will men, and

H2: women will be more sympathetic to others experiencing the work-family conflicts illustrated in the scenarios developed by the researchers than will men.

Second, because women are more likely to suffer from the negative rami- fications of sex role stereotyping,

H3: women will show less support than men for traditionally defined sex roles and parental roles, and

H4: women will be less likely than men to consider gender as a variable when making decisions concerning the specific work-family scenarios provided by the researchers.

Third, because there is much evidence to suggest that men and women are very much concerned with work-family trade-offs,

H5: men and women will show equal concern/support for issues dealing with the impact of nonwork-related issues on work effectiveness, and

H6: men and women will show equal concern/support for issues focusing on the importance of work and family.


METHODS

Samp&

The sample was composed of 240 undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in upper level business courses at a midsized Southern state college (26% were graduate students). One hundred and nineteen of the participants were male and 121 were female. The average age of the respondents was 26.5 years. Over 85% of the respondents were employed in occupations other than student on either a full- or part-time basis. Eighty- two percent of respondents reported working 20 hours or more per week. Seventy percent reported incomes greater than $10,000 per year, while 40% earned over $20,000 per year. Twenty-nine percent of the respondents were currently married, and 65% of respondents had never been married. Among married respondents, 80% had spouses who worked full time and 12% had spouses who worked part time. Seventy-two percent of working spouses earned more than $20,000 per year. Twenty-one percent of respondents had at least one child, while 82% of the respondents without children said that they planned to have children within the next 10 years.

Procedure

A questionnaire was developed specifically for this study. The Career Issues Survey was divided into three sections. Section one contains seventy Likert-scaled items. These items were developed by the researchers to represent a wide variety of issues relevant to work-family interdependency, and are based on a review of current literature focusing on important career and family issues faced by individuals in today's work force. Respon- dents were asked to indicate, using a 5-point Likert scale, the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with the particular item. Section two contains five different career scenarios about which individuals were asked to make a specific decision. The scenarios were developed by the researchers to represent some realistic decisions related to work-family interdependency. These two sections of the questionnaire were utilized in order to examine the relationship between career issues attitudes and potential actions. In addition, the researchers felt the use of these two different types of questions would reduce the biases inherent in single method studies (Martin, 1981).

The final section of the questionnaire is composed of items that focus on biographical characteristics of the respondents. The questionnaire was pretested on a sample of 33 undergraduate and graduate business students

398 Covin and Brush

in order to ensure that the instructions, career issue items, and scenarios were clearly understandable. As a result of the pretest, the instructions were refined and questions that proved difficult to answer, or were thought to be unclear in any way, were deleted or reworded. The questionnaire takes approximately 20 minutes to complete.

Although the survey questions and scenarios were developed inde- pendently by the researchers, there is some methodological overlap with other research that focused on similar issues (see, for example, Kovach, 1985; Powell, 1988). While it could be argued that the same questions in- cluded in earlier studies should have been asked in order to provide con- tinuity, it was felt any findings consistent with past research would be all the more significant if somewhat different methods and measures were used to assess common issues. Specifically, one can be particularly confident that conclusions relating to a particular topic are valid when different methods and measures yield similar results (Cronbach & Meehl, 1955).

FINDINGS

Responses" to Career Is'sues

In order to assess dimensionality and commonality among the Lik- ert-scaled items and to reduce the number of variables for analysis, responses to the 70 career issue items in Section One of the questionnaire were factor analyzed using principal component factoring and a varimax rotation. Exploratory factor analysis was utilized to identify the factor struc- ture that best fit the data. A seven-factor solution was judged the most theoretically meaningful and interpretable solution. Retained in the final solution were 42 items with factor loadings greater than .4.

Scales were developed representing each of the resulting seven factors. These scales define categories or domains of key themes in work- family interdependency, and offer a more comprehensive and accurate representation of these complex issues than would single-item scales. Table I shows the correlations among the seven factors identified. The items comprising each factor, the factor loadings, the alpha coefficients, as well as the mean scores and standard deviations for the factor analysis-derived multi-item scales are shown in Appendix A. A brief description of each factor follows.

Factor ~1 ("government/employer work-family policy responsibilities") is composed of items related to the role of government and business in providing assistance for employees with children. The theme defined by this factor is the demand for greater responsibility on the part of govern-


Table I. Zero-Order Correlations Among the Seven-Factor Analysis Derived Scales a

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7

F1 .05 -.19 b -.02 .26 c .03 -.03 F2 .05 .39 c .31 c .21 b .18 .09 F3 -.19 b .39 c .35 c -.01 .17 .16 F4 -.02 .31 c .34 c .27 c .12 -.04 F5 .25 c .21 b -.01 .27 c .08 -.01 F6 .03 .18 .18 .12 .08 -.01 F7 -.03 .09 .16 -.04 -.01 -.01

aFl: government/employer work-family policy responsibilities; F2: parental responsibility for child care; F3: nonwork issues as limits of work effectiveness; F4: traditionally defined sex roles; F5: family importance; F6: work commitment; F7: gender preference for a manager.

bp = .01.

~p = .ool.

ment and employers in assisting with child care related issues. A low score on Factor 1 would indicate that individuals think government and employers should play a large role in helping people to manage work-family interdependency. Overall, study participants agreed (mean score of 2.71) that employers and government should play a strong role in helping employees to deal with work-family conflicts.

Factor 2 ("parental responsibility for child care") consists of items related to who should be responsible for children. The items focus on the degree to which parents (especially mothers) should assume total responsibility for children without concern for career- and work-related matters. A low score on Factor 2 would be interpreted as agreement with traditionally defined parental roles (i.e., one person, preferably the mother, should stay home with children). In general, study participants disagreed with the notion that having children means staying home (mean score of 3.64).

Factor 3 ("nonwork issues as limits of work effectiveness") deals with the degree to which family-related issues detract from perceived work effectiveness. A low score on this factor would indicate that study participants believe nonwork factors do impact work effectiveness--particularly for women. Study participants, as a group, tended to disagree that nonwork issues necessarily have or should have a negative impact on the perception Of a person's competence in the work place (mean score of 3.83).

Factor 4 ("traditionally defined sex roles") is comprised of items that focus on judgments of right and wrong sex role behavior. A low score on this factor would indicate agreement with the notion that individuals have particular responsibilities/roles because of their gender. The mean score

400 Covin and Brush

for this factor (3.92) seems to indicate that study participants disagree with some commonly held beliefs about the impact of women in the workplace.

Factor 5 ("family importance") focuses on the relative importance/impact of family-related matters. A low score on this factor would indicate that individuals feel family has a positive impact on life--including one's work. Overall, the mean score of 2.46 suggests that study participants agree that family matters should take priority over work-related concerns and that family experiences may have a positive impact on careers.

Factor 6 ("work commitment") consists of items reflecting the desire to work. A low score on this factor would indicate that individuals would prefer not to work. Study participants, as a group, tended to disagree that work is a "necessary evil." The mean score on this factor (3.45) suggests that study participants desire to work.

Factor 7 ("gender preference for a manager") consists of 2 items reflecting participant preference for a male or female manager. A low score

Table II. Results of t Tests Comparing Mean Factor Scores of Male and Female Respondents a

Men Women Significance (17 = 119) (n = 121) level

Factor 1 Government/employer work-family

policy responsibilities

Factor 2 Parental responsibility for child care

Factor 3 Nonwork issues as limits of work

effectiveness

Mean 2.82 2.58 .01 SD .61 .72

Mean 3.50 3.78 .01 SD .61 .69

Mean 3.63 4.02 .001 SD .60 .57

Factor 4 Traditionally defined sex roles Mean 3.63 4.26 .001

SD .63 .51 Factor 5

Family importance

Factor 6 Work commitment

Factor 7 Gender preference for a manager

Mean 2.42 2.54 SD .61 .73

Mean 3.43 3.46 SD 1.0 1.0

Mean 2.72 2.62 SD .73 .74

n s

n s

n s

al: 1 strongly agree with this statement. 2: I mildly agree with this statement. 3: I have no opinion regarding this issue. 4:1 mildly disagree with this statement. 5:1 strongly disagree with this statement.


on this factor would indicate a preference for a male manager. In general, study participants expressed a mild preference for working for a male manager (mean of 2.65).

Gender Differences in Career Issue Responses

Two-tailed t tests were used to explore possible differences in factor scores between men and women in the sample. This analysis revealed that there were significant differences between male and female responses on 4 of the 7 factors identified. These results are discussed below and are also summarized in Table II.

1. Women in the sample expressed significantly more agreement (p < .01) tha0 men with statements that express a strong need for employer and government support in helping employees to cope with child-related issues (Factor 1).

2. Women were significantly (p < .01) less likely to agree that there should be strictly defined parental responsibilities (Factor 2). Because 4 of the 8 items comprising this factor focused specifically on the female parental role, it is reasonable to conclude that men in the sample were more likely to agree that women should play the role of the "traditional mother" once a child is born. The mean scores on the individual factor items also support this conclusion.

3. Women expressed significantly more disagreement (p < .001) than men with issues concerning the question of whether nonwork issues limit work effectiveness (Factor 3). In other words, women were less likely to feel performance (particularly for females) suffers because of nonwork-related events.

4. Women in the sample were more likely to disagree (p < .001) with statements that express some commonly held stereotypes about the impact of women in the work force (Factor 4). In essence, women in the sample tended to be more sensitive to statements that cast women in a negative light than were men.

These findings offer strong support for Hypotheses 1, 3, and 6. Women showed more agreement with statements advocating a major role for employers and government in managing work-family conflicts (Factor 1) than did men, as suggested by Hypothesis 1. Women were more likely to disagree with statements favoring traditional parental roles (Factor 2) and traditionally defined sex roles (Factor 4) than were men. These findings are supportive of Hypothesis 3. Hypothesis 6, which argued that there would be no significant differences in family importance (Factor 5) and

402 Covln and Brush

Table III. Significance Tests for Scenario Decisions

Scenario Set 1 Scenario Set 2

Males/females Males/females Interpretation (n = 52) (n = 58) (n = 59) (n = 62) code a

Scenario 1 Mean 1.21/1.24 1.05/1.03 1 SD .41/.54 .22/.17

Scenario 2 Mean 1.09/1.17 1.50/1.18 2 SD .30/.37 .50/.39

Scenario 3 Mean 1.78/1.75 1.76/1.79 SD .42/.44 .43/.41

Scenario 4 Mean 1.15/1.05 1.71/1.84 3 SD .36/.22 .46/.37

Scenario 5 Mean 1.64/1.56 1.60/1.52 SD .48/.50 .49/.51

al: Significant differences between male responses to Scenario Sets 1 and 2, and female responses to Scenario Sets 1 and 2 (p < .05). 2: Significant difference between men and women in Scenario Set 2 (p < .01), and between the male responses for Scenario Sets 1 and 2 (p < .001). 3: Significant differences between male responses to Scenario Sets 1 and 2, and female responses to Scenario Sets 1 and 2 (p < .001).

work c o m m i t m e n t (Fac to r 6) be tween men and women, was also suppor ted . T h e r ema in ing ca r ee r i s sue- re la ted hypothes is (H5) is not s u p p o r t e d by the da t a as w o m e n were more , r a the r than equally, likely to d i sagree with s ta te - men t s suggest ing tha t nonwork issues limit work effect iveness.

Responses to Career Scenarios

Two sets o f five ca r ee r scenar ios were r andomly d i s t r ibu ted to s tudy pa r t i c ipan t s as par t of the C a r e e r Issues Survey. These scenar ios a re shown

in A p p e n d i x B. The scenar io sets a re identical except that the g e n d e r of the focal individuals prof i led in the scenar ios was var ied in four of the five

cases. This p rovided an oppor tun i ty to examine how par t i c ipan ts would respond to the g e n d e r of the individual highl ighted in the scenar io .

Par t i c ipan ts were asked to indicate the decis ion they would make re- gard ing a pa r t i cu la r scenar io by checking an a p p r o p r i a t e response . Fo r Sce- nar ios 1-3, s tudy par t i c ipan ts were asked to make a "yes" o r "no" decision. F o r Scenar io 4, r e sponden t s were asked to indicate whom they would hire, and in S c e n a r i o 5, r e s p o n d e n t s were a sked to check e i the r " m o v e " o r "s tay." Whi l e one could a rgue that the scenar ios may not necess i ta te c lear- cut dec is ions (i.e., "yes" o r "no ," "move" or "s tay") , the r e sea rcher s felt a l lowing a neu t ra l r esponse (such as "maybe , " "it d e p e n d s , " etc.) would cause pa r t i c ipan t s to avoid making a decision. Responses were coded as


either 1 or 2, and mean scores were computed for each scenario. Two-tailed t tests were then utilized to examine differences in responses both within and between scenario sets. Results are summarized in Table III.

The first scenario set involved the following: (1) a hiring decision where the most qualified candidate, a female, planned to have a child during the year; (2) responding to a request by a female middle manager to work part-time until her 2-month-old child was at least 1 year old; (3) a discharge decision regarding a key male accountant (during tax season) who had six absences due to child-related problems; (4) a hiring decision for a position requiring extensive travel, where the final candidates are two equally qualified women, one of whom has two young children; and (5) a personal decision to accept or reject a promotion requiring relocation (this scenario was not varied between scenario sets).

There were no significant differences in male and female responses to Scenario Set 1. Both men and women were likely to hire the female in Scenario 1, and were likely to allow the woman described in Scenario 2 to work part time. The participants in the study were sympathetic toward the male employee with the sick child and were not likely to discharge him (Scenario 3). Participants were less sympathetic toward the female job candidate in Scenario 4 with two children. Both men and women in the sample were more likely to hire the female job candidate with no children. Scenario 5 was not varied between scenario sets. Men and women in this sample were equally as likely to move as to stay given a career opportunity that would force them to uproot their families.

The second scenario set involved the following: (1) a hiring decision where the most qualified candidate, a male, planned to have a child during the year; (2) responding to a request by a male middle manager to work part time until his 2-month-old child was at least 1 year old; (3) a discharge decision regarding a key female accountant (during tax season) who had six absences due to child-related problems; (4) a hiring decision for a position requiring extensive travel, where the final candidates are two equally qualified men, one of whom has two young children; and (5) a personal decision to accept or reject a promotion requiring relocation.

In the second scenario set, both men and women were likely to hire the male secretarial candidate in Scenario 1, and indicated an unwillingness to discharge the female employee with a sick child (Scenario 3). In Scenario 4, men and women in the sample were more likely to hire the male candidate with children. The only significant difference (p < .01) between men and women occurred for Scenario 2. While women were likely to allow the male middle manager to work part time until his child was at least 1 year old, the males in the sample generally were not.

404 Covin and Brush

An examination of the way in which males as a group and females as a group responded to the two sets of scenarios yields additional significant differences. For example, both men and women were significantly less likely (p < .05) to hire the female secretarial candidate who expected to have children (Set 1, Scenario 1) than the male secretarial candidate who expected to have children (Set 2, Scenario 1). Men in the sample were more likely (p < .001) to allow the female middle manager to work part time while her child is young (Set 1, Scenario 2) than to allow the male middle manager to work part time under the same circumstances (Set 2, Scenario 2). Finally, in Scenario 4, both men and women were more likely (p < .001) to hire the male with children (Set 2) than the female with children (Set 1).

These findings offer only limited support for Hypotheses 2 and 4. Hypothesis 2 argued that women would be more sympathetic to others experiencing work-family conflicts than would men. In support of this hypothesis, women were more likely than men to allow the male manager to work part time (Set 2, Scenario 2). On the other hand, when other within- scenario set responses are compared, men and women were equally likely to hire the female planning on having children (Set 1) and the male planning to have children (Set 2) in Scenario 1, and equally likely not to discharge the man (Set 1) and woman (Set 2) with child-related absences (Scenario 3). It seems fair, then, to conclude that women were not necessarily more sympathetic than men.

Hypothesis 4 suggested that women would be less likely than men to consider gender as a variable when making scenario decisions. While women may have been slightly more likely to treat men and women equally, it appears that gender was a significant consideration for women in making several decisions. For example, both men and women were significantly less likely to hire the female secretarial candidate who expected to have children (Scenario 1, Set 1) than the male secretarial candidate who expected to have children (Scenario 1, Set 2). In addition, both men and women were more likely to hire the male with children (Scenario 4, Set 2) than the female with children (Scenario 4, Set 1). This and other findings would suggest that both men and women considered gender as a variable in their decisions.

Relationship Between Career Issue Attitudes and Scenario Decisions

One-way analysis of variance was used to determine if average factor scores differed by scenario decision. In other words, is there a relationship between attitudes toward various career and family issues and related ac-


tions? If this were the case, one would expect the mean factor scores to differ for different scenario decisions. For example, if family importance (Factor 5) were related to Scenario 5, mean factor scores for respondents indicating move should be significantly different from the mean factor scores of respondents indicating stay. Significant relationships between career issue attitudes and scenario decisions are summarized and discussed below.

Mean scores for Factor 3 (nonwork issues as limits of work effectiveness) were most likely to vary between different responses across scenarios. Women who disagreed more strongly with Factor 3 (indicating a belief that nonwork factors do not impact work effectiveness--particularly for women) were more likely (p < .05) to hire the women who planned to have children (Scenario 1, Set 1) and more likely (p < .05) to choose the move alternative to Scenario 5 (Sets 1 and 2) than women showing stronger agreement with these issues. Men who disagreed more strongly with Factor 3 were more likely (p < .01) to allow the male in Scenario 2 (Set 2) to work part time than those men indicating stronger agreement with these issues.

Factor 1 (government/employer work-family policy responsibilities) ratings were also strongly related to scenario responses. Women showing strong agreement with Factor 1 (indicating a belief that employers should play a large role in helping people manage work-family interdependency) were more likely (p < .01) to allow the woman in Scenario 2 (Set 1) to work part time, and men agreeing with these issues were more likely (p < .001) to let the male work part time in Set 2 than were other women and men in the sample. Women who indicated less agreement with Factor 1 were more likely (p < .01) to fire the male with the absenteeism problem (Scenario 3, Set 1) than women showing stronger agreement with Factor 1 issues.

Factor 2 (parental responsibility for child care) was related only to male responses to Scenario 4 (Set 2). Men who hired the male with no children were significantly more likely (p < .01) to disagree with traditionally defined parental responsibilities than were other men. Men who selected the male candidate with no children (Scenario 4, Set 2) were more likely (p < .05) to disagree with clearly defined sex roles (Factor 4) than were other men. Women agreeing more with the importance of family (Fac- tor 5) were more likely (p < .05) to allow the woman and man in Scenario 2 (Sets 1 and 2) to work part time than were other women. Women who said they would discharge the woman in scenario three (Set 2) expressed a greater preference (p < .05) for a male manager (Factor 7) than did those women expressing a weaker preference for a male manager.

In general, then, Factors 1 and 3 showed the strongest relationship with career scenario decisions. In other words, attitudes toward government/employer work-family policy responsibilities and beliefs about the ira-

406 Covin and Brush

pact of nonwork issues on work effectiveness, more so than the other categories of issues identified, suggest how people will react (or say they will react) to the work-family conflicts represented in the scenarios. It is also interesting to note that attitudes toward the various career issues--that is, the factor sco res - -appea r be t te r predictors of scenario responses for women than for men (i.e., a larger number of significant relationships between career issue categories and scenario responses were found for women than for men). This suggests that work-family attitudes are possibly better predictors of related behavior among women than men. However, additional research would certainly be necessary before a more definitive ex- planation of this finding could be offered.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

There are, of course, several limitations to this study. The data are limited in that they represent the judgments of individuals enrolled in one educational institution in one geographic region. In addition, a majority of participants in the study are unmarried and childless. Therefore, it could be argued that may not be the most realistic sample for this research in terms of their perceptions of career and family trade-offs.

However, while the sample is composed of "students," nearly all respondents are currently employed and are demonstrating a strong commitment to remaining in the work force by striving for an undergraduate or graduate degree. Further, statistical analysis revealed that marriage and children do not account for major differences across the sample. When the responses of married participants were compared with the responses of never-married participants, only one significant difference in the mean factor scores was discovered. Individuals who were married disagreed more strongly (p < .01) with statements focusing on traditionally defined sex roles (Factor 4). No significant differences were identified between the mean factor scores of respondents with children and those without children, those in undergraduate vs. graduate programs, respondents under the age of 30 as compared with respondents over the age of 30, and respondents working full time vs. part time. Nonetheless, the sample may be more representative of individuals about to enter the work force than full-time employees and more representative of individuals with a college education than those without a college degree. The following discussion should be considered with these potential limitations in mind.

This study has identified several significant differences between men and women in their perceptions of various career issues, and in their responses to several career scenarios. These differences have been highlighted

Male and Female Attitudes Toward Career and li'amily 407

throughout the article. However, the study has also pointed to important similarities in the attitudes and potential actions of men and women.

In general, both men and women showed mild endorsement for nontraditional practices and roles. Men and women tended to agree that government and employers should play a proactive role in managing the work-family interface (Factor 1) and tended to disagree with traditional parental roles and sex roles (Factors 2 and 4), as well as statements suggesting that nonwork issues limit work effectiveness (Factor 3). The results, however, suggest that women may be more sensitive to these issues than men. This finding is consistent with earlier research (see, for example, Thornton, 1989).

Overall, male and female respondents were in agreement regarding the importance of work and family (Factors 4 and 6). Men and women as a group indicated that family life was important and likely to have a positive influence on one's work. In addition, both men and women expressed the desire to work. These results support the findings of Freidman (1987), Powell (1988), and others. Finally, men and women responded similarly to items indicating a gender preference for a manager. As has been the case in several other studies (see, for example, Dudno, 1985; Sutton & Moore, 1985), men and women in this sample expressed a slight preference for a male manager.

The use of scenarios in the study allowed more insight into the relationship between attitudes toward the various career issues and potential actions. The results suggest that attitudes toward two of these categories of issues--the role of government and employers in managing the work- family interface (Factor 1) and the impact of nonwork issues on work effectiveness (Factor 3)--are often related to the decisions made when confronted with particular career scenarios. Attitudes toward the career issue factors, in general, were more closely related to scenario decisions for women than for men.

The scenario results also point to interesting inconsistencies. For example, while women indicated disagreement with issues suggesting that nonwork issues limit work effectiveness (Factor 3), responses to Scenarios 2 and 3 would suggest that women do believe child rearing does constrain a woman's work effectiveness. While men in the sample were "nontraditional" in terms of understanding the need to take care of a sick child (Scenario 3), they were quite traditional in terms of their responses to interim part- time work (allowing women but not men to work part time in Scenario 2). In addition, although both men and women indicate general disagreement with traditional parental and sex roles, a significant gender bias is evident in scenario responses. For example, when faced with the decision to hire a person who expected to have children, both men and woman were significantly less likely to hire the female than the male (Scenario 1). A similar

408 Covin and Brush

situation was found in Scenario 4 where both men and women were significantly more likely to hire the male with children rather than the female with children for a job that required travel. Kovach (1985) found a similar bias in another study utilizing scenarios. He concluded that male and female study participants were equally guilty of sex role stereotyping.

The preceding findings suggest that stated attitudes toward work-family issues may not translate directly into consistent behavior. The introduction of pro-family policies, then, must be carefully planned and conscientiously implemented in order to ensure that intended objectives are met and dys- functional consequences are minimized. Hall (1989) suggests that companies must create a corporate-wide discussion about work life, family life, and the meaning of success. Nollen (1989) provides guidelines for human resource (HR) managers, noting that HR managers should (1) examine their corporate culture and make HR management more supportive, (2) implement specific programs that address the work-family relationship, and (3) support com- munity organizations and influence public policy.

Finally, this research clearly suggests that many traditional organizational policies regarding family issues are inconsistent with what is desired and needed by a growing percentage of the work force. Chapman (1987) notes that there is a growing willingness of parent employees, men and women, to attend to family matters at the expense of their jobs, and that there is increased acceptance of the belief that this is the right thing to do. Recent polls suggest that a majority of business executives believe work- family policies will be highly important in the future (Cordtz, 1990). While these developments are promising, care must be taken to avoid labeling work-family interdependency as a female concern, thereby making it more acceptable for all employees to directly take advantage of new opportunities and assistance in accommodating the demands of work and family.

REFERENCES

Atlanta Journal and Constilulion. (1989, August 21 ). Survey: Men and women want more family lime. pp. A5, Al l .

Axcl, H. (1985). Coq~orations and J?mfflies: Changing practices and per.~pectives. New York: The Conference Board.

Baderschneider (1989). The Mobile Oil Career Study. Paper presenled at the annual meetings of the Academy of Management, Washington, DC.

Barnett, R., & Baruch, G. (1987). Determinants of fathers' p~,rticipation in family work. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 29-40.

Berk, S. (1985). The gender facto& The appol:tionment of work in American households. New York: Plenum.

Bernard, J. (1981). The good provider role: Its rise and fall. American Psychologist, 36, 1-12. Burden, D., & Googins, B. (1987). Boston University balancing job and homelife study. Boston

University School of Social Work.

Male and Female Attitudes Toward Career and I"amily 4119

Burke, R. J. (1989). Some antecedents and consequences of work-family conflict. In E. Goldsmith (Ed.), Work and family: Theoly, research and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. .,~

Chapman, F. 11987, February). Executive guilt: Who's taking care of the children'? Fortune, pp. 30-37.

Cordtz, D. (1990). Hire me, hire my family. Financial WorM, 159 76-79. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulleth~,

52, 281-302. Dambrot, F., Papp, M., & Whitmore, C. (1984). The sex-role attitudes of three generations

of women. Personality and Social Psychology Btdlethl, 10, 469-473. Davidson, M., & Cooper, C. 11985). Women managers: Work, stress and marriage.

hlletTlalional Journal for Social Economics, 12, 17-25. Doyle, F. P. 11989). People power: The global human resottrce challenge for the nh~eties. Plenary

paper, World Management Congress, CIOS. Dubno, P. (1985). Is corporate sexism passe? Bttsitless attd Society Review, 53, 59-61. Employee Benefit Plan Review. (1985, June). Working parents lose work time because of child

care problems, pp. 52-54. Etaugh, C., & Kasley, H. (1981). Evaluating competence: Effects of sex, marital status and

parental status. Psychology of Women Qttarterly, 6, 196-203. Etaugh, C., & Nekolny, K. 11990). Effects of employment status on employment of mothers.

Sex Roles, 23, 273-280. Etaugh, C., & Poertner, P. (1989). Perceptions of women: h~fluence of pelformance, marital

and parental variables. Paper presented at the meetings of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.

Etaugh, C., & Study, G. G. 11989). Perceptions of mothers: Effects of employment status on perceptions of mothers. Sex Roles, 20, 59-70.

Ferce, M. M. (1991)). Beyond separate spheres: Fcminism and family rcsc:lrch..Iottrnal of Man'iage attd the Famil); 52, 866-884.

Fernandez, J. P. (1986). Child care and co~7Jorate prodttctivity: Resolving family/work col~[Ticts. Lexington, MA: Lcxington Books.

Friedman, D. E. (1987, August). Work versus family: War of the worlds. Pel'sollnel AdmhffstratoJ, pp. 36-38.

Gier, J. A. (1989). Work and family, personal issttes, and enTployee productivity. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Boston, MA.

Green, R. (1989). Work-family life issues: Corporate studies, positions and policies. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Society tbr Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Boston, MA.

Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-80.

Gutek, B., Nakamura, C., & Nieva, V. (1981). The independence of work ~md lamily roles. Jottt77al of Occupational Behavior; 2, 1-6.

Hall, D. (1989). Moving beyond the mommy track: An organizational change approach. Personnel, 66, 23-29.

Hall, D. T., (1990, winter). Promoting work/family balance: An organizational change approach. Organizational Dynamics, pp. 5-18.

Heilman, M., & Martell, R. (1986). Exposure to successful women: Antidote to sex discrimination in applicant screening decisions. Organ&ational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 376-390.

Helmreich, R., Spence, J., & Gibson, R. (1982). Sex role attitudes 1972-1982. Personality and Social Psychology BtdlethT, 8, 656-663.

Hughes, D. (1988). The work and family life studies: An overview of ongoing research and selected findings. Paper presented at the Conference Board Symposium on Workplace Research on the Family, Harriman, NY.

Jick, T. D., & Mitz, L. F. (1985). Sex difference in work stress. Academy of Management Review, 10, 408-420.

410 Cnvin and Brush

Justin, F. T., & Stafford, F. P. (1985). Time, goods and well-behTg. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.

Kovach, K. (1985). Sex role stereotyping by tomorrow's executives. Personnel, 62, 14-20. Kraut, A. I. (1990). Some lessons on organizational research concerning work and family

issues. Human Resource Planning, 13, 109-118. Leinster, C. (1988, April 25). The young exec as superdad. Fortune, pp. 233-242. Martin, J. (1981). A garbage can model of the psychological research process. American

Behavioral Scientist, 25, 131-151. Meneghan, E. G., & Parcel, T. L. (1990). Parental employment and family life: Research in

the 1980s. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 1079-1098. Nollen, S. (1989). The work-family dilemma: How HR managers can help. Pelwmmel, 60, 25-30. O'Carolan, T. (1987, August), Parenting time: Whose problem is it? Personnel Administrator,

pp. 58-63. Orthner, D. K. (1980). Families hr bhte: A study of married and sh~gle parents hl the Air Force.

Washington, DC: Department of the Air Force. Pleck, J. H. (1985). Working wives~working husbands. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Pleck, J. H. (1977). The work-family role system. Social Folves, 24, 417-427. Pleck, J. H., Staines, G. L., & Lang, L. (1980). Conflicts between work and family life. Monthly

Labor Review, 103, 29-3t. Powell, G. (1988). Women and men hz management. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Rodgers, F. S., & Rodgers, C. (1989, November-December). Business and the facts of family

life. Halyard Business Review. pp. 121-129. Russell, J. E., & Rush, M. C. (1987). The effect of sex and marital/parental status on

performance evaluations and attributions. Sea Roles, 17, 221-236. Russo, N. F. (1976). The motherhood mandate. Journal of Social Fomes, 32, 143-154. Schmidt, P. (1989, July). Are you stuck on the mommy track? Child, pp. 74-77, 139-140. Schuler, R. S., & MacMillan, I. C. (1984). Gaining competitive advantage through human

resource practices. Human Resource Management. 20, 241-255. Schwartz, F. N. (1989, January-February). Management women and the new facts of life.

Halyard Business Review, pp. 65-76. Shelton, B. A., & Firestone, J. (1988). Time constraints on men and women: Linking

household labor to paid labor. Sociology and Social Research, 72, 102-105. Sobkowski, A. (1989, May/June). The mommy track controversy. Executive Female, pp. 40-42,

67-68. Stackel, L. (1987). EAPs in the workplace. Employment Relations Today, 3, 289-294. Sutton, C., & Moore, K. (1985). Executive women--20 years later. Halyard Business Rev&w,

62, 43-66. Thompson, L., & Walker, A. J. (1989). Gender in families: Women and men in marriage,

work, and parenthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 845-871. Thornton, A. (1989). Cbanging attitudes toward lamily issues in the United States..IottlTtal of

Marriage and the Family, 51, 8773-893. Trost, C. (1987, November 30). Best employers lor women and parents. Wall Street Jotttvta],

p. 23. Trost, C. (1988, November 1 I). Men, too, wrestle with career-family stress, l,Va//Street JoutTtal,

p. B1. Voydanoff, P., & Kelly, R. F. (1984). Determinants of work-related family problems among

employed parents. Journal of Marriage attd Family, 46, 881-892. Voydanoff, P., & Kelly, R. F. (1985). Work family role strain among employed parents. Family

Relations, 34, 367-374. Wilcox, J. (1989). Mommy track, daddy track. TrahlhTg and Develol)ment JotaTtal, 43, 12-14. Wiley, M. G., & Eskilson, A. (1988). Gender and family/career conflict: Reaction of bosses.

Sex Roles, 19, 445-465. Wiley, D. (1987). The relationship between work/nonwork role conflict and job related

outcomes: Some unanticipated findings. Journal of Management, 13, 467-472. Zappert, L. T., & Weinstein, H. M. (1985). Sex differences in the impact of work on physical

and psychological health. American Journal of Psychiaoy, 14, 1174-1178.


APPENDIX A

Factor Analysis Derived Multi-Item Scales

Factor 1. Government/employer work-family policy responsibilities (alpha = 78, mean = 2.71, standard deviation = .30).

Item Factor loading

1. Companies should be responsible for providing day care facilities for the children of employees. .511

2. Men have just as much right to paternity leave as women do to maternity leave. .438

3. The government should require companies to provide some paid maternity leave. .559

4. When a woman decides to have children her company should give her the option of working part-time in her position. .449

5. Companies should give women several months of paid leave following the birth of a child. .553

6. Companies should not be responsible for providing special benefits to employees just because they have children. 3 -.498

7, Employers should provide extra support and flexibility for male employees who have children. .646

8. A woman should be guaranteed by law the same job when she returns fiom pregnancy leave. .525

9. The government should subsidize day care for working parents. .495

10. Employers should provide extra support and flexibility for female employees who have children. .660

11. In general, employers haven't done enough to help employees who are parents. .607

Factor 2. Parental responsibility for child care (alpha = .79, mean = 3.64, standard deviation = .69).

Item

1. If a couple can afford it, one parent should stay home with the children.

3For scaling purposes, these items were reverse scored.

Factor loading

.581

412 Covin and Brush

2. In general, I believe that the mother should have primary responsibility for raising the children. .473

3. A woman should quit work as soon as she knows she is pregnant . .461

4. One parent should stay home with the children, whether or not a couple can afford it. .482

5. It is wrong to leave children in day care centers. .643 6. It is wrong for a woman to work outside the home

when she has small children. .628 7. The parent with the lesser paying job should stay

home with the children. .610 8. A mother should stay home with her pre-school children. .684

Factor 3. Nonwork issues as limits o f work effectiveness (alpha = .71, mean = 3.83, s tandard deviation = .43).

I tem

1. As an employer, I would be less likely to hire a woman than a man for a job which requires extensive travel. .487

2. In general, women are not as commit ted to their careers as men. .560

3. A woman ' s commi tment to her work generally decreases after she has had a child. .416

4. As an employer, I would prefer to hire a woman with no children. .439

5. Men are more concerned about success in work than are women. .582

6. I think that having children almost always has a negative impact on a woman ' s career. .515

7. In general, women are able to compete on an equal basis with men only if they have no children. .453

8. I think that a man can have both a successful career and a successful homelife. 3 - .409

Factor loading

Factor 4. Traditionally defined sex roles (alpha = .66, mean = 3.92, s tandard deviation = .47).

.

I tem

If a woman plans to have children, she should inform prospective employers.

Factor loading

.575


2. I think it is a c o m m o n practice for a company to turn down a male job applicant in favor of a less- qualified female applicant. .562

3. Paid p regnancy leave for women consti tutes dis- cr iminat ion against men. .411

4. I believe that a woman should not have authori ty over a man in the work place. .459

5. I think that it is wrong to let boys play with dolls. .619 6. I believe that women who work are taking jobs

away f rom men who need jobs. .471

Factor 5. Family impor tance (alpha = .61, mean = 2.46, s tandard deviat ion = .46).

I t em Fac tor loading

1. Raising a family is the most impor tant exper ience one can have in life. .500

2. I have decided that my family will always come before my career . .578

3. W h e n males have children they seem to become more achievement-or iented . .501

4. Raising children is at least as rewarding as having a good career. .583

5. W h e n females have children they seem to b e c o m e more achievement -or ien ted . .586

Factor 6. Work c o m m i t m e n t (alpha = .74, mean = 3.45, s tandard deviat ion = .37).

I t em

1. If I had a choice between working and staying home, I would stay home.

2. If I didn ' t need the money, I wouldn ' t work.

Factor loading

.751

.738

Factor 7. G e n d e r p re fe rence for a manage r (alpha = .75, mean = 2.65, s tandard deviation = .03).

.

I t em Fac tor loading

In general ,3I would prefer to work for a female manager . - .627

414

2. In general, I would prefer to work for a male manager.

Covin and Brush

.743

APPENDIX B

Career Scenarios

Set 1 (Set 2). 1. You are the manager responsible for hiring a new secretary for your office. The most qualified applicant is a 25-year-old female (male). However, during the course of the interview she (he) tells you that she plans (he and his wife plan) on having children within the next year. Would you hire this person? (Coded Yes = 1, No = 2, for both scenario sets).

2. One of your employees, a female (male) middle manager that has been with your company for 4 years, had her (his) first child 2 months ago and has just returned to work. She (He) is finding it difficult to keep up with her (his) management responsibilities and her (his) responsibilities at home. She (He) has asked if you will allow her (him) to work on a part-time basis until her (his) child is at least one year old. No other management employee has ever made this request. Will you allow her (him) to work part-time? (Coded Yes = 1, No = 2, for both scenario sets).

3. This is tax season and one of your key accountants, Bob (Mary) Jones, left you a message this morning indicating that he (she) will not be able to come to work today as his (her) child has the chicken pox. This is the sixth time this year that child-related problems have kept Bob (Mary) from coming to work. You have ah'eady warned him (her) that these absences are not acceptable. Will you discharge Bob (Mary)? (Coded Yes = 1, No = 2, for both scenario sets).

4. You are in the process of selecting a new regional sales manager. You must decide between 2 candidates, Susan (Mike) Smith and Janet (John) Brown. The job requires a great deal of travel and the candidates are equally qualified. Both have M.B.A.s from good schools, extensive experience,,and each is married. However, Janet (John) Brown has 2 young children. You must make the decision today as both candidates have other job offers. Whom would you hire? (Coded Susan = 1, Janet = 2, for scenario set one and Mike = 1, John = 2, for scenario set two).


5. You have been offered a promotion that would require you to re- locate your family to another city. If you accept the position, your spouse would have to leave a good professional job. Your children are happily enrolled in school and prefer not to move. However, your salary and future career opportunities would increase substantially if you made the move. What would you do? (Coded Move = 1, Stay = 2, for both scenario sets).

an examination of male and female attitudes toward career and family issues

Documents